Aiki as a concept- why all the fuss?

[WVMark]

1. From Invincible Warrior by John Stevens: Regarding Takeda, "His extraordinary ability was due to mind control, technical perfection honed in countless battles, and mastery of aiki, the blending of positive and negative energy."

2. Shirata: By means of the breath (iki) of the Heavens and the breath of the Earth, through the in and yo (yin and yang) the multitude of things has come to be born. The breath of the Heavens and the Earth is the abdomen of everyone, and when a person partakes of this breath the techniques of aiki are born, with and by means of the Positive and Negative Principles.

3. Michio Hikitsuchi: The Kojiki started from the birth of the universe. By studying this you will understand the true meaning of aikido. There were two gods Izanagi and Izanami, a couple from whom several other gods were born. Both of them mean the breath in and out (akatama and shirotama).

and

Everything comes like yin and yang. Izanagi is yang and heaven. Izanami is yin and heaven.

4. Henry Kono (Aikido Today Magazine; #31 Dec.93/ Jan. 94)
Interview of Henry Kono sensei by Virginia Mayhew and Susan Perry.
ATM: When you had conversations like these with O'sensei, what would you talk about?
HK: Well, I would usually ask him why the rest of us couldn't do what he could. there were many other teachers, all doing aikido. But he was doing it differently - doing something differently. His movement was so clean!
ATM: How would O'sensei answer your questions about what he was doing?
HK: He would say that I didn't understand yin and yang [in and yo]. So, now I've made it my life work to study yin and yang. That's what O'sensei told me to do.

ME: I think we can say that Takeda knew what yin/yang meant. I think we can say Shirata did, too. I'm not all that knowledgeable about Hikitsuchi, but it's a good guess he understood yin/yang. At least somewhat. When we get to Kono, he's asking questions. Good for him, btw. He's trying to find out how to do what Ueshiba does. But, he clearly doesn't understand yin/yang then. Not only that, but the really critical point that is inferred is that a lot of other teachers didn't understand yin/yang either.

What is it about yin/yang? Ueshiba references in/yo, ka/mi, Izanagi/Izanami, Izu/Mizu all the time. It was all his terminology for yin/yang. Contradictory forces. And yet, all those references of Ueshiba can be traced back to the body.

5. Ueshiba:
Put the active principle (yo) into the right hand
Turn the left into the passive (in)
And so guide the adversary

The Pine, the Bamboo, and the Plum
The make up of Ki that we are training to purify
From where do they arise?
The Water and Fire of the change in the self.

6. In an interview with Masando Sasaki, we read: I remember he got angry at me when I asked him, "Sensei, how should I explain when people ask me what aikido is?" (laughter) Hardly anyone had even heard of aikido back then, so I always had a hard time explaining it. I figured Ueshiba Sensei would be able to explain it since he was the one who created it. But when I asked him, he stamped the ground and exclaimed, "Aiki? I am aiki!"

7. Ueshiba: If you wish to apply Ki-no-Miyoyo from the foundation of this nen, be aware that the left side of the body will be the basis for Bu, while the right side will offer an opening for connection with the ki of the universe. When the links between left and right are complete, then one's movements become totally free.

ME: Change the body with in/yo. As stated previously, the book about Miyamoto Musashi talked about contradictory forces in the body. Morita Monjuro recalls (page 263) his experiences with training in kendo. He comes to the conclusion that there must be a cross body connection. The right foot along with the left hand. Then the left foot along with the right hand. He agains mentions diagonal forces on page 266.

Ueshiba talks about spirals winding up on the right and winding down on the left. He talks about the aiki cross. Ueshiba was training diagonal forces, or cross body connections.

We find that in/yo is part of the body. We find references to that in Transparent Power where Sagawa states boldly that aiki is a body training method.

8. In Transparent Power by Tatsuo Kimura: The elder Sagawa, who sometimes had a fiery temper, would take what he learned from Takeda and try it out on strong and mean-looking construction workers he came across. He quickly realized that if you lacked the sort of aiki that Sokaku Takeda possessed, none of the techniques would work against a persistent opponent. So Sagawa's father said to Takeda, "I'm already so old, I think it would be better if you'd teach me Aiki instead of techniques."

9. Mrs. Horikawa knew that aiki changed the body.
Stan Pranin talking about training and states, It's the idea of "stealing techniques with your eyes," isn't it?
Mrs. Horikawa replies, It's not with the eyes, it's with the body.

[WVMark]

Kano’s concept of Ju no Ri, was based upon the Taoist precept, “reversing is the movement of the Tao,” also described by the statement “the most yielding things in the world overcome the most unyielding.” Kano combined Ju no Ri with the interplay of forces as defined by the precept of in-yo (yin and yang, hardness and softness, negative and positive, receptiveness and resistance), and used the following to explain his concept of Kuzushi founded on Ju no Ri.

[Raff]

There's a short passage from Tokimune about breath training that appears here.

Best,

Chris

Thank you Chris. I wonder if this short passage is not taken from the book written by Tokimune Sensei and privately published inside his own organization.

By the way, congratulations for your blog.

[muden]

So far as I'm aware, Dan has never taught anything done by Henry Kono. He does quote a remark made to Kono by Ueshiba, but that's a somewhat different matter. Kono has his own take on what Ueshiba meant, which is fine, folks are free to try both approaches and decide for themselves what they think.

Best,

Chris

Yes, you've also stated that Dan doesn't teach inner level teachings of DR such as asagao and aiki age/sage (among others), so that's fine.
I chose my words very carefully Chris. If anyone is really interested, they can find out for themselves, but that's all I'm saying on this.

[muden]

I hesitate to state my opinions as to what Dan is or isn't aware of, and I have talked and trained with him regularly over a number of years. I should think that you would be even more hesitant to make such statements based on your very limited exposure.

Be that as it may. What if you argued against the assertions themselves? If you think that your understanding is different than state what that understanding is and why it's different and let the arguments speak for themselves rather than involving the personalities making the arguments.

Best,

Chris

This is the crux: IP guys pull out discriptions of yin and yang and aiki from disparate sources and say that they are they same thing that ye are doing, but you won't state where you learned it and to what level. The context in which this was learned is obviously crucial, for such a vague concept.

And Dan is missing stuff relating to this (IMO). Not that there's anything wrong in that, but people should be aware of this but Casting aspersions on my experience doesn't change this. I'm not going to state what it is.

[Chris Li]

Yes, you've also stated that Dan doesn't teach inner level teachings of DR such as asagao and aiki age/sage (among others), so that's fine.
I chose my words very carefully Chris. If anyone is really interested, they can find out for themselves, but that's all I'm saying on this.

My post as censored yet again, so you guys carry on.

If you recall I said that he does not teach those things in the context of Daito-ryu, and he doesn't. If you're asserting that those individual principles are proprietary and exclusive to Daito-ryu then I'll have to disagree.

Since you've stated that Dan doesn't know the inner teachings:

BTW, your assertions about yin and yang as used in DR are off the mark. It is an oral teaching and you are not aware of its meaning in DR.

Then I don't see how you can then imply that he is teaching those teachings that he doesn't know, in either case.

BTW, your assertions about yin and yang as used in DR are off the mark. It is an oral teaching and you are not aware of its meaning in DR.Even referring to akido, Your teaching of yin and yang as used by Henry Kono (from ueshiba) is also different. You are simply not aware of what Henry is doing in relation to this, or how Ueshiba transmitted this.

Again, if you have an argument to make then why not try making it without reference to the personalities involved and accusations about what someone may or may not know. Tell us what your understanding of yin and yang in DR are and how they are different from what Dan is doing. As I side note, tell us why what Henry is doing is relevant to what Dan's doing (I don't believe that it is, as I stated previously) and tell us (since you imply that you know above) how Ueshiba transmitted it.

Best,

Chris

[Chris Li]

This is the crux: IP guys pull out discriptions of yin and yang and aiki from disparate sources and say that they are they same thing that ye are doing, but you won't state where you learned it and to what level. The context in which this was learned is obviously crucial, for such a vague concept.

And Dan is missing stuff relating to this (IMO). Not that there's anything wrong in that, but people should be aware of this but Casting aspersions on my experience doesn't change this. I'm not going to state what it is.

FWIW, many (most/all) of the Daito-ryu guys involved in these discussions have failed to state what they have learned and to what level as well. Isn't that relevant? Because I can state straight out that I have more time in traditional Daito-ryu training in a recognized lineage than some of the people talking here - and I don't even consider myself a Daito-ryu guy. You can't just assume that because someone says "I study" Daito-ryu (or anything else) that they necessarily know what they're talking about.

Further, I haven't cast any aspersions on your experience. I did say that you have had limited exposure to Dan, so how can you readily determine what he does and doesn't know?

It seems as if you are looking for an argument from authority, but the fallacy here is that there is no guarantee, based on the record, that just because one comes out of a particular lineage or has a particular piece of paper that they know X or can do X. I can name you dozens of lineage holders in both Chinese and Japanese arts that have plenty of papers - but little of the ability. Even within Daito-ryu it's common (as I'm sure you know) for people to have low opinions of other people (even people with plenty of papers) within the art.

As far as Dan's training history, it's not particularly secret - but you'll have to ask him nicely and directly.

In any case,it's not about Dan, not at all, and his training history (which I have no problem with) isn't particularly relevant to an online discussion. I could (perhaps) see the point if he were claiming to teach Daito-ryu or starting his own lineage with Daito-ryu in the name (as many others have) - but that's not the case, not at all.

This constant demand for proof based on lineage is just another way of shifting the argument from the message to the messenger, If you have a problem with the message, then present your argument based on the message.

Best,

Chris

[Dan Harden]

FWIW, many (most/all) of the Daito-ryu guys involved in these discussions have failed to state what they have learned and to what level as well. Isn't that relevant? Because I can state straight out that I have more time in traditional Daito-ryu training in a recognized lineage than some of the people talking here - and I don't even consider myself a Daito-ryu guy. You can't just assume that because someone says "I study" Daito-ryu (or anything else) that they necessarily know what they're talking about.

Further, I haven't cast any aspersions on your experience. I did say that you have had limited exposure to Dan, so how can you readily determine what he does and doesn't know?

It seems as if you are looking for an argument from authority, but the fallacy here is that there is no guarantee, based on the record, that just because one comes out of a particular lineage or has a particular piece of paper that they know X or can do X. I can name you dozens of lineage holders in both Chinese and Japanese arts that have plenty of papers - but little of the ability. Even within Daito-ryu it's common (as I'm sure you know) for people to have low opinions of other people (even people with plenty of papers) within the art.

As far as Dan's training history, it's not particularly secret - but you'll have to ask him nicely and directly.

In any case,it's not about Dan, not at all, and his training history (which I have no problem with) isn't particularly relevant to an online discussion. I could (perhaps) see the point if he were claiming to teach Daito-ryu or starting his own lineage with Daito-ryu in the name (as many others have) - but that's not the case, not at all.

This constant demand for proof based on lineage is just another way of shifting the argument from the message to the messenger, If you have a problem with the message, then present your argument based on the message.

Best,

Chris

Hi Chris
All of these discussions around who knows what are pointless.
1. Judged on the initiation argument
We have people of various ranks saying this or that is not DR, this or that is not Aikido. Then we see people of equal or higher rank saying this...IS...DR or Aikido.
2. Judged on a world and historical view?
The DR and Aikido people continue to show that they have a very limited education or understanding to compare. As Peter, Mark, Cady, and you and I have pointed out; the DR seniors pretty much categorically disagree with the very few dissenting voices here, and also with each other. I try to stay away from their acidic commentary about each others menkyo and shihan level teachers who keep saying each other style doesn't have aiki. The same goes for many in Aikido, with this or that school claiming superiority in aiki...snooze.
3. Judged on the actual skill level? And that against even mild free style sparing, much less trained aggression instead of kata? It doesn't look good at all. As you have personally seen over and over. The question I ask is why should, or would, anyone care what they think about aiki at all? I mean why? I have seen and felt so many of their various shihan all I say is...."No thank you very much. Would you like to see how to make that work in the real world and how it compares to your own historical roots?"
4. Yin Yang.
Now we have juniors from DR and Aikido upping the anti and stating that others have a) a limited view on yin yang, that b) DR doesn't have solo training or breath work and body work, or that c) aiki is NOT from changing your own body, and that d) everything they do is singular and unique in all the world.. It is so preposterous that it is embarrassing. Their founders and seniors were and are continuing to quote the Chinese, and continue showing exercises practiced throughout Asia.
It speaks for itself. Their is a bigger picture that many were not taught and unaware of because their own leaders said not to teach them.

Oisin
5.You keep getting censored because you keep attacking me personally, without cause. I find your approach odd, since you essentially re-state what I state over and over. That what we do is not DR.
6. Now furthering your argument, about yin yang. You are once again left without credibility, while all but quoting me on your web site-you also fit right in with my opening post:
If we are left to discuss based on rank and skill and deep initiation into all things... no one from any side can enter the argument. Stating our understanding of yin/yang is incomplete? Just how is that Oisin? That evaluation would mean you have to have deep initiation into DR (which you do not) and have deep initiation into what we are doing (which you do not have). Based on actual skill? If my understanding of yin/yang had to be judged on the skills of the thousands I have met practicing the aiki arts, I am content, as I am sure you are and others are as well. To each their own.

[WVMark]

This is the crux: IP guys pull out discriptions of yin and yang and aiki from disparate sources and say that they are they same thing that ye are doing, but you won't state where you learned it and to what level. The context in which this was learned is obviously crucial, for such a vague concept.

And Dan is missing stuff relating to this (IMO). Not that there's anything wrong in that, but people should be aware of this but Casting aspersions on my experience doesn't change this. I'm not going to state what it is.

I find this post amazing. You are stating that where and what level of our learning is crucial, but you have yet to do the very same thing in regards to yourself ... especially since you are stating we're wrong. You're trying to apply one set of standards to us but yet violate those same standards on yourself. You've cast aspersions on Dan's experience first and then find some semblance of a slight against you when you're called on it?

BTW, your assertions about yin and yang as used in DR are off the mark. It is an oral teaching and you are not aware of its meaning in DR.Even referring to akido, Your teaching of yin and yang as used by Henry Kono (from ueshiba) is also different. You are simply not aware of what Henry is doing in relation to this, or how Ueshiba transmitted this.

So, I have to ask some questions since this is the level of standard that you, yourself, are setting.

1. How many years in Daito ryu have you trained? Under whom?
2. Have you trained intensively and for long periods with the head of your school?
3. Have you been shown the inner teachings of your art? If not, how does that qualify you as knowing what those inner secrets are or are not?
4. How are you qualified to know what the inner teachings of other Daito ryu lineages are or are not? You use blanket statements about all of Daito ryu in regards to what we know or don't know.
5. How many years in aikido have you trained? Under whom?
6. Have you trained with Ueshiba?
7. Have you trained with any first generation students of Ueshiba? Those outside Tokyo?
8. Have you trained with Henry Kono? How many years?
9. How does your experience stand up to those others you say are wrong. You know, those aikido people who are shihan and are in the inner circle of their organization, those people who have trained with Ueshiba and/or first generation students, etc.

Please provide the answers before posting more about the subject matter at hand. This is your standard and as such, I think you should be held very strictly to it.

Oh, and for the record. I am NOT an "IP guy". I'm an aiki guy. More specifically, I'm an "Ueshiba's aikido" guy.

Mark

[Dan Harden]

I find this post amazing. You are stating that where and what level of our learning is crucial, but you have yet to do the very same thing in regards to yourself ... especially since you are stating we're wrong. You're trying to apply one set of standards to us but yet violate those same standards on yourself. You've cast aspersions on Dan's experience first and then find some semblance of a slight against you when you're called on it?



So, I have to ask some questions since this is the level of standard that you, yourself, are setting.

1. How many years in Daito ryu have you trained? Under whom?
2. Have you trained intensively and for long periods with the head of your school?
3. Have you been shown the inner teachings of your art? If not, how does that qualify you as knowing what those inner secrets are or are not?
4. How are you qualified to know what the inner teachings of other Daito ryu lineages are or are not? You use blanket statements about all of Daito ryu in regards to what we know or don't know.
5. How many years in aikido have you trained? Under whom?
6. Have you trained with Ueshiba?
7. Have you trained with any first generation students of Ueshiba? Those outside Tokyo?
8. Have you trained with Henry Kono? How many years?
9. How does your experience stand up to those others you say are wrong. You know, those aikido people who are shihan and are in the inner circle of their organization, those people who have trained with Ueshiba and/or first generation students, etc.

Please provide the answers before posting more about the subject matter at hand. This is your standard and as such, I think you should be held very strictly to it.

Oh, and for the record. I am NOT an "IP guy". I'm an aiki guy. More specifically, I'm an "Ueshiba's aikido" guy.

Mark

Hi Mark
I know his background and rank and from whom. I am not going to say anything as it is as irrelevant as if he had twenty more years and two more ranks under him. Trying to validate arguments on aiki as a concept, based on someones expertise or rank, then requires that each individual must have expertise in all things being discussed...in order to adequately compare any one thing.
As a defined control group, one would then need to have several such people to have the comparison have any actual worth. In all the world, you will not even find even...one..such person.

You are right that using their own illogical standards -which they themselves created- turned back on them has ticked them off. A few here -for some un-explainable reason- can't seem to understand how ludicrous it is as a standard.

So why justify it with further dialogue? That was my opening post in defining the various groups and my later, more expanded, explanations.

In my own view, ignoring them, and then continuing to do what we have been doing; showing their own seniors comments contradicting these few low level people's views, and then showing the historical pedagogy behind these concepts and the reasons they have remained a staple in the martial arts is the best way to go.
It is a larger more in depth discussion than any one art, regardless of any one persons starry eyed view that their art is unique in all the world. I just heard this last month from a guy who just started BJJ. He never heard of Judo ne-waza or that the triangle choke was invented by Mifune.
Who's fault is that?
The teacher?
Or the student not doing the research?
Does it matter that he is embarrassing himself publicly? Not to him, at least not right now.

[Cady Goldfield]

This is the crux: IP guys pull out discriptions of yin and yang and aiki from disparate sources and say that they are they same thing that ye are doing, but you won't state where you learned it and to what level. The context in which this was learned is obviously crucial, for such a vague concept.

FWIW, I wouldn't look at such things as "aiki-age," and "aiki-sage" as discrete techniques (it often seems they are being treated that way); rather, they arise from a greater cyclical body process of which aiki-age and aiki-sage are just two options for deliberate expression. That body process can be tweaked to a number of different directions, degrees of power, and uses. It is the same one that drives a number of internal martial arts systems in China and elsewhere. Daito-ryu created a couple of terms to describe two of those expressed forms of use (i.e. aiki-age/sage), but it does not mean that they created those expressive forms or the greater method behind them.

In systems where teaching is done largely by touch and feel -- hands-on transmission -- understanding of concepts and principles ends up being intuitive and non-rational for the most part. The body "feel" comes first, then the terms "yin/in" and "yang/yo" ... as well as "Heaven, Earth, Man" and "anatomy trains," for that matter... make sense and fit as the individual starts putting those terms and intellectual concepts toward describing what they are doing, enacting and feeling on the "inside," and the physical effect they are overtly having. For students who have not yet developed the basic ability to create the forces of internal power and of aiki, the words can only be a memorized, cryptic tract for which they lack the physical experience and wisdom to comprehend. This is only natural, and probably every one of us who has trained in internal systems has gone through this aspect of the training process.

[Koshu]

Yin and yang as a "vague concept".

I'm Asian-American, born to Asian immigrants, and grew up at a time when, in the west, many if not most non-Asians were still clueless and would ask upon first meeting me, "What part of China are you from?" (hey, given the population of China relative to the entire world then and now, I suppose they had a better-than-even chance of that question actually being appropriate in fact, if not in tone).

I've noticed that the vast majority of the vocal IP detractors over the years (now going on decades) are in Asian arts -- but aren't Asian. Anyone stop to think to wonder why that is??

In Asian culture, yin and yang is defacto. No, not every Asian kid is indoctrinated into its finer points, or even receives any formal introduction to it, if any express discussion about it at all. In some Asian cultures, the concept isn't even Daoist per se, but rather the concept of natural balance is paramount (e.g. in Filipino animism). It simply is part of the way we see the world. It is a given. The men with martial and healing power in the various Asian cultures are those indoctrinated into the specifics of the various ways of utilizing yin, yang, et al: forces that maintain the balance in nature. Whether we are fortunate to become one of them or not, matters not in terms of their existence. They're there, doing the esoteric stuff they do.

Since the Daoist Chinese and Japanese concepts have been sliced, diced and analyzed to pieces here, on Aikiweb, etc. for going on 20 years now, let's cite something else different yet related, from this article: http://www.seasite.niu.edu/tagalog/m...us_beliefs.htm. One snippet exemplifies a non "yin" and "yang" concept, that nonetheless is used in the culture to seek balance in how one conducts one's life: "Among the Bagobo, each person had a right-hand soul and a left-hand soul. The right-hand soul was the good side of the individual and went to heaven after death. The left-hand soul was the evil in each person and at death it went either to the underworld, or stayed on earth to vex the living." So, in that particular sub-culture, there wasn't a single soul that's judged then goes to either Heaven or Hell, as in prevailing western (i.e. Christian) doctrine, but rather, a premium on managing the opposing forces/natures within one's self while alive.

From my particular sub-culture: "The Ilokanos believed in three sould [sic] in the body. The eternal soul that continued after death was known as Kararwa according to Calip, while Alingaas the soul that is found at places one has been previously; and Karma the soul that inhabits the living body. Sometimes, Karma is seen as a vapor that leaves the body either as an invisible vapor or in the form of an insect travelling to far places. Sometimes, the karma even left the body while the individual was awake. For example, those returning from the forest would make recitation Intayon, Intayon, or Intayon kaddua, while striking the chest with the palm, invoking the Karma to return from the forest to the body." Oh snap, we Ilokanos have something akin to the concept of ki, to go along with the yin-and-yang-like admonitions sprinkled throughout the culture as a whole.

So, when I first met my Hakkoryu teacher, Gil Adams, a westerner who'd been indoctrinated into the okuden of his art and worked hard to make those skills his own, and he hit a tsubo that caused effects similar to what Hidemine Jibiki relates in this article upon meeting Ryuho Okuyama, I simply signed up to train on the spot, and haven't looked back.

When I first met Dan Harden, a westerner who'd been indoctrinated into the okuden of his art and worked hard to make those skills his own, and he asked me after a training session, seemingly surprised, outside of the Pagoda Hotel in Ala Moana, "You don't need convincing? You already know this is real?" Again, I haven't looked back.

But I didn't just meet these men before buying in. They provided irrefutable proof. Those who know me know that by trade I'm, you could say, a professional skeptic by necessity. My job involves weeding out B.S. artists, and helping prosecute them, if necessary. You must not trade on third- or even second-hand accounts. You must go to primary sources. In the martial world, my audit trail is hands-on. I've done that due diligence. Yin and yang in application as profound power and skills drops you on your butt with the slightest of contact, obliterates your force while strangely inducing kuzushi, makes you stick to the tori, impairs your breathing, messes up your vision, makes you nauseous, freezes/locks your body, and/or a bunch of other stuff depending on what that flavor of IP is in play. I've felt all these things. It syncs up with the cultural paradigms I grew up with, and with the online anecdotes of the IP crowd. It is, therefore, real.

[WVMark]

Immobility. Morihei Ueshiba stated that the reason he was immobile and couldn't be pushed over by Tenryu was that he knew the secret of aiki. As we know from Sagawa, aiki is a body changing method, not something gained by technique based training. Yet, Ueshiba, Sagawa, Musashi, all could move about easily. They knew that immobility was the ability to remain unperturbed by outside forces in any situation. Immobility was a body skill that allowed one to withstand an attacker's attack, whether sitting, standing, or moving, and be free in their own movement without hindrance from the attacker's energy. The extra advantage of this trained aiki body was that those who came into contact with it had their center captured immediately. They found themselves behind the curve and trying to catch up without knowing or understanding why. This allowed Ueshiba, Sagawa, Musashi, etc to be able to move slowly. Yet, another advantage of this trained aiki body is that slack is removed, allowing one to move quicker. One cannot do this without the immobility, hence speed is not worth as much as slowness and slowness is not worth as much as immobility.

From the Aikido Journal Youtube vid on Seigo Yamaguchi. Subtitled. Interesting. He says, "Motion in stillness, stillness in motion. In motion, yet immovable."

Then he goes on to give the secret to it. "They sound like Zen koans, but with our bodies, we can gain clear understanding of such ideas. We forge such a body, and such a mind, rather than simply trying to learn techniques."

Here we have another aikido shihan that most looked up to, who is stating outright that techniques aren't the way to become great. He's echoing Sagawa in that one must change the body. And he's touching on immovability as the others did (Ueshiba, Horikawa, Sagawa, etc).

Interesting that all these things tie in together with other martial systems, eg koryu, Musashi's writings, Daito ryu, etc all the way back and through Chinese martial arts, yoga, Chinese medicine, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0CkjGyykm4

[Chris Li]

From the Aikido Journal Youtube vid on Seigo Yamaguchi. Subtitled. Interesting. He says, "Motion in stillness, stillness in motion. In motion, yet immovable."

Yamaguchi used to say this quite a bit (but I think that people mostly ignored him ). Actually, Moriteru Ueshiba said the same thing here:

The Founder said it was more important to harmonize with people than to win by depending on power. Switching from ‘skills of fighting’ to ‘harmony’ is the purpose of training. Love is all “Ki (life energy)” based on “En No Ugoki (circle movement)”, “Irimi (entering)”, “DoChuSei (quietness in turmoil)” and “Chushin (immovable center)” to train our skills with each other. There is no conflict in this training. Aikido is “a way to absolute self-accomplishment”.

"Quietness in turmoil" (as it is translated on the Aikikai English web site) is actually more commonly translated as..."stillness in motion" (動中静). I mentioned some other instances "stillness in motion" in this article (Hint: one of them is Yamaguchi, and another is Taiji's "Song of the 13 Postures").

Best,

Chris

[cxt]

"drops you on your butt with the slightest contact....makes you stick to the tori, impairs your breathing, messes up your vision, makes you nauseous, freezes/locks your body........"

Actually that stuff is precisely why you GET "IP detractors" in the first place.

Amazing Randi has a million bucks cash for anyone that replicate such paranormal abilities in the lab----and nobody has even come close to doing so.

Are there no widows and orphans that could use the money/help?

What is lacking is a precise definition of what is exactly meant by "IP" at any given time and discussion.